has anyone else talked to Davis (CA-53)’s people? Their position totally confuses me: reform good, on the fence about pledging and unwilling to openly embrace a public option (”it’s complicated”), but on the record supporting HR676 and criticizing Obama’s plan precisely because it didn’t have a public option. Color me confused.

A: The Democrats are willing to do whatever we, the people want, as long as they don’t have to alienate too many campaign contributors, friendly lobbyists, corporations in their districts, media executives, and just about anybody else with money and power. That leaves “us” trying to compel “them” to stand up to the wealthy and powerful special interests–even in the guise of Grassley!

Why do I keep seeing these visions of children being sacrificed to Molech whenever I think of Democrats writing legislation?

The CEOs refused to stop using Recission to throw people off their policy and to avoid paying claims. The Public Option is the only way to insure those with pre-existing conditions and be sure their claims are paid. Imagine the nightmares of those with pre-existing conditions being told they were insured, paying premiums only to fall victim to remissions all over again. Someone needs to make this small leap in logic the same way Obama did about them worrying about the “incompetent government” putting them out of business.

So as the minority party’s ranking member on the Senate Finance Committee, Senator Grassley is committed to subsidies as the vehicle by which to deliver high quality health care to all uninsured Americans. I can guarantee you that the moment that bill passes almost every business that offers health insurance to its employees will cancel their plan ridding themselves of of the nightmare of obtaining and administering a group health insurance plan. Then they can dole out those dollars as bonus compensation to employees who distinguish themselves, or simply pocket the savings. They won’t feel compelled to increase their employees pay (although some may) because Senator Grassley will offer federal subsidies to those whose income qualifies them for a subsidy.

The end result will be that the federal government will pay for health care in the form of subsidies, and there will be no “unfair” competition to bring down the price of health insurance premiums. So if the cost of your health insurance plan is $10,000 per year and you qualify for a 50% subsidy then the federal government will pay for one-half of your insurance premium or $5.000. As opposed to a single payer system where ones premium might be expected to be $5,000 annually and a 50% subsidy fro an individual/family paying that rate would be $2500 or half of what the federal government would pay under the Grassley plan.

What the Senator from Iowa fails to appreciate is that he has done nothing to reduce my insurance premium and he has compounded the problem by requiring the US taxpayer to subsidize the full price plans of the other 40 million Americans without health insurance, which will double the moment this bill passes, which will result in an increase in health care expenditures and even larger increases in the future. This is like the drug prescription benefit where public policy is shaped around the wants of the pharmaceutical companies, only larger by several magnitudes.

Nice job Senator Grassley! Way to look out for the public interest in high quality affordable health care and the rest of the American economy that depends upon healthy Americans with differing amounts of disposable after-tax incomes to provide the demand that is necessary for a free market economy to grow.

I don’t know what you left out of the bill that the health insurance companies want, but don’t worry I’m sure the great Senator from the State of Indiana will leap to their rescue. You have don enough for them already!

The end result will be that the federal government will pay for health care in the form of subsidies, and there will be no “unfair” competition to bring down the price of health insurance premiums. So if the cost of your health insurance plan is $10,000 per year and you qualify for a 50% subsidy then the federal government will pay for one-half of your insurance premium or $5.000. As opposed to a single payer system where ones premium might be expected to be $5,000 annually and a 50% subsidy fro an individual/family paying that rate would be $2500 or half of what the federal government would pay under the Grassley plan.

doesn’t single payer make more sense than that? Then, the insurance corps will INCREASE the premiums so we’ll be paying the same anyway…sorta like the military contractors do….
I don’t see where Grassley gets his figures anyways, out o’ the air.

And Grassley, who has enjoyed that odious “government-run healthcare plan” for decades, also doesn’t give a good colonoscopy that polls show more than half of his constituents want an option to buy into that government-run plan.